Hacker News Reader

Comment by dfens | Hacker News Reader

"Why should something that I can get for free cost money?"

Are you for real?

Oil is something that is truly scarce... there is only so much oil to go around. Same with food and water. Our economy is based on the scarcity of energy.

An MP3 only has artificial scarcity. The energy it costs to copy an MP3 is infinitesimal. The point of the artificial scarcity is to allow the artist to make money by selling his information. In an economy with no scarcity, this doesn't work. The artist needs to make money by selling something that is scarce, like a live performance.

So when you're done making your web app everyone can have a copy of the code ... right?

I don't think it's a very good comparison. Everyone can "view source" and see the html code used to display the site. They can't get the actual code that creates the app's functionality, in the same way that you can't decompile an MP3 and get the instrumental tracks that make it up.

I was referring to all your code, not just the HTML. Which, of course, you wouldn't want people copying no matter how easy or hard it is to do. After all, your app will be the result of months of your hard work and effort. The same is true of music.

There's a difference: I own the code that's on my server, but the artist does not own the music that's on my desktop; I do (logically, if not legally). If I sell software to someone, and then they want to sell copies, that's their right. I use licenses which explicitly recognize that right, but even if I didn't it should still be up to them, except where contractually barred.

If the artist wants to keep people from selling music they've produced, they're free to do so, by not selling it or giving it away. When they've sold something, however, it's not up to them to control another's actions indefinitely.

Obviously this is heavily at odds with current law where I live, but fortunately it's easy to get around said law by using licenses which give legal weight to rights a person should have with respect to easily copied materials.

The artist (or record company) /does/ own the copyrights to the music on your desktop.

When you purchased their music, you most likely entered an agreement not to reproduce/distribute it.

I don't think most people enter into any such agreement. Usually nothing is said about that before the sale, and any contract presented after the sale cannot be valid.

That doesn't mean US courts won't enforce it anyway, of course. :( Eventually that will change, I expect.

Well, they couldn't get mp3s from CDs until new technology made this possible. So if I had some technology which allowed me to get your source it would be okay for me to copy and use it, right?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com